Mahlangu v Samancor Chrome Ltd (Eastern Chrome Mines) (JA117/2018) [2020] ZALAC 14; [2020] 8 BLLR 749 (LAC); (2020) 41 (ILJ) 1910 (LAC) (18 May 2020)

Mahlangu v Samancor Chrome Ltd (Eastern Chrome Mines) (JA117/2018) [2020] ZALAC 14; [2020] 8 BLLR 749 (LAC); (2020) 41 (ILJ) 1910 (LAC) (18 May 2020)

The Labour Appeal Court found that the respondent differentiated between the appellant and other pregnant employees by failing to place her in an alternative position prior to maternity leave, based on her second pregnancy within a three-year cycle. This differentiation amounted to unfair discrimination on the prohibited ground of pregnancy under the Employment Equity Act. The respondent failed to justify the discrimination as rational or fair. The arbitrator erred in awarding damages without supporting evidence and in ordering the redrafting of the respondent's policy, as these issues were not properly before him. The appellant is entitled only to the salary she would have earned had she...

Citation
[2020] ZALAC 14
Parties
Appellant: Khomotjo Mahlangu; Respondent: Samancor Chrome Ltd (Eastern Chrome Mines)
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 May 2020
Case Number
JA117/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Labour Court order set aside; respondent ordered to pay appellant salary for specified period.
Judges
Waglay, Jappie, Savage
Legal Topics
Unfair Discrimination, Pregnancy Discrimination, Employment Equity Act, Maternity Leave Policy
Labour Law Unfair Discrimination Pregnancy Discrimination Employment Equity Act Maternity Leave Policy

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khomotjo Mahlangu

Appellant

Samancor Chrome Ltd (Eastern Chrome Mines)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent unfairly discriminated against the appellant on the ground of pregnancy by failing to place her in an alternative position prior to maternity leave.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's maternity policy and its application constituted unfair discrimination under the Employment Equity Act.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's award of damages and order to redraft the policy were permissible.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court found that the respondent differentiated between the appellant and other pregnant employees by failing to place her in an alternative position prior to maternity leave, based on her second pregnancy within a three-year cycle. This differentiation amounted to unfair discrimination on the prohibited ground of pregnancy under the Employment Equity Act. The respondent failed to justify the discrimination as rational or fair. The arbitrator erred in awarding damages without supporting evidence and in ordering the redrafting of the respondent's policy, as these issues were not properly before him. The appellant is entitled only to the salary she would have earned had she...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Labour Court order set aside; respondent ordered to pay appellant salary for specified period.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds.
  • The order of the Labour Court is set aside and replaced as follows: